Pioneer MCACC Reference Guide Available for Download - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 18Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 12:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,339
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 342 Post(s)
Liked: 1163
Pioneer MCACC Reference Guide Available for Download



You are invited to download this guide to Pioneer's auto room-correction system, which includes more technical detail than most marketing material.

As many AVS members know, automatic room correction has been available in AV receivers and preamp/processors for years. You place the microphone that came with the AVR or pre/pro at your listening position and connect it to the device, then you initiate a process within the unit that plays a series of signals on each speaker in your system. The AVR or pre/pro analyzes the sound captured by the microphone and automatically sets various parameters, such as speaker size (large or small) and the distance from each speaker to the mic (which determines the amount of delay to apply to each channel) as well as equalization, which cuts or boosts different frequency ranges to compensate for an uneven frequency response at the listening position due to the room's acoustics.

There are many such systems available today, including Pioneer's MCACC (Multi-Channel ACoustic Calibration), Yamaha's YPAO (Yamaha Parametric Acoustic Optimizer), and Audyssey (used in current Onkyo, Integra, Denon, and Marantz products). Depending on the room, the results are often better than the default settings, but not always; for more on AVS members' experiences with auto room correction, see the poll, "Does Auto Room Correction Do More Good or Harm?"

Pioneer's auto room-correction system is now available in three versions—MCACC, Advanced MCACC, and MCACC Pro—which are implemented in the company's AVRs according to price and performance level. In order to help consumers understand MCACC, Pioneer has allowed me to make available a detailed reference guide or "white paper" that explains the essence of the system, the inner workings of each version, and additional technical details. To download a copy of this document, click here.

Of course, the MCACC Reference Guide is from Pioneer, so it extols the virtues of the system without mentioning any potential limitations. But it does include more technical detail than I've seen in most marketing material, with lots of helpful graphics. It also reveals that subwoofer equalization—the absence of which was one of the most common consumer complaints—is now available in Advanced MCACC and the new MCACC Pro; in fact, the Pro version can equalize two subwoofer outputs independently.

If you're interested in learning more about how Pioneer's auto room-correction system works, the 2014 MCACC Reference Guide provides lots of useful info, and it's free. What's not to like?

Note: This is the first of what I plan to be many technical white papers made available for downloading on AVS from a variety of companies and organizations.

Like AVS Forum on Facebook

Follow AVS Forum on Twitter

+1 AVS Forum on Google+

Scott Wilkinson
AVS Editor
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 12:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
javanpohl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,094
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post
in fact, the Pro version can equalize two subwoofer outputs independently.
Well that right there might have gotten them a new customer.
javanpohl is online now  
post #3 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 01:31 PM
Senior Member
 
BNestico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Elysburg, Pennsylvania
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 141
I thought Onkyo switched to a proprietary room correction software in their newest line of receivers.
BNestico is offline  
post #4 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 01:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 578
just goes to show how far behind pioneer has been this whole time.

I think Anthem's ARC deserves a special mention here as one that is possibly surpassing Audyssey XT32 with its ability to be customized with real time feedback.
grasshoppers and jproy13 like this.
mo949 is offline  
post #5 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 03:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bigham16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lewisville, TX
Posts: 590
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Now if Pioneer would release an 11.2 processing receiver, I would go back to them.



______________________
7.2.4 Home Theater Thread
Bigham16 is offline  
post #6 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 04:09 PM
Senior Member
 
jer181's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Does anyone happen to know if you can download the new programs into existing AVR's that have the MCACC original program?
jer181 is online now  
post #7 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 04:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
canton160's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK & Portugal
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 34
I would like someone from pioneer explain what they call to this to this technology called Auto phase control plus

Quote:
Phase Control Plus technology automatically adjusts and compensates the phase lag (group delay) included in the sound source, from 0 to 16 msec in 1 msec increments. In addition to solving the phase lag (group delay) in audio devices such as AV receivers and speakers, the phase shift sometimes included in discs or broadcasts can also be adjusted, allowing precise control of every phase, from audio source to output. With the synergy effect of the original Phase Control compensation, all sounds are aligned, providing better balance for the overall reproduced sound, exceptionally powerful and dynamic bass, and clear high frequencies.

Theres any kind of filter used in receiver like the TDAI2200, or something else..

Because IMHO It takes time for a signal to go through a circuit, It also takes a certain amount of time for the signals to get through each piece of equipment, Once we get a signal into a mechanical device such as a speaker, whether it is passive or active, we now have the sum total of all the electrical plus mechanical phenomena to take into account.
Since you CAN'T get rid of the delay, the only answer is to delay something else so it all "matches up" in the end..

Heres a catch, if we add a sub in the system (its multichannel right ? ) You cannot take away the inherent delay in the entire electro-mechanical physics of the sub, but you can ADD further electrical delay..

what was the solution/crossover/filter that pioneer has to match the sub and speakers in phase ?

Auto phase control plus = marketing ??????

Im not trolling but i think this is the answer....

Quote:
Multi-channel sounds on Blu-ray Discs, DVDs, or 5.1ch WAV/FLAC are sometimes recorded with LFE channel delay (about max. 16 msec) caused by the LPF (low-pass filter) when the discrete sounds are packaged. This delay in the low frequencies affects not only the bass, but also the main channel playback, dulling the rhythm and sound.

How the consumer going to find the recordings that has group delay in LFE channel...should we call the studios.. ???

Portuguese Blog & Forum Discussion about Audio & Video
Visit our Blog & Forum CinemaHIFI.PT
Like cinemahifi on Facebook

Last edited by canton160; 07-17-2014 at 05:00 PM.
canton160 is offline  
post #8 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 04:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Posts: 5,080
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 657
Just had a quick read over it. A few thoughts:

1. Generally a nice room correction system.
2. They use a 9 band eq and justify the low Q of these eq's by saying high Q eq introduces to much phase shift. This is a silly explanation, although I generally agree that room correction should only use low Q eq unless it's very intellegent. And there are much better reasons for this than their reason: phase.
3. Their "Standing Wave Control" sounds like a 3 band PEQ on the subs, nothing more.
4. Full band phase control. This is interesting. I'm not sure there's any benefit and I'm a little unsure how they can get the data to do what they say they're doing. I think you'd need anechoic measurements to do this. Also, the example they show has the woofer showing up in the IR 2ms behind the tweeter and mid. Perhaps there are speakers out there, that bad, but I've never seen one. I generally don't believe this is all that useful, but I'm not sure.
5. The synergy of accurate distance adjustment, hmm. This looks great, but only works at exactly one location in the room. Literally less than 12" change in distance changes their pretty little IR.
6. Lots of emphases on phase, although I think it's mostly about distance. Phase sounds more impressive.

For comparison, here is an IR of a 3 way speaker I designed about a year ago. The measurement conditions (outdoors on a tall stand) allowed for a reflection free IR to about 9ms (you can see the little blip at about 9ms). You can see the IR is very tight within 0.5ms.



If I took the same measurement on my couch indoors, the IR would be an incredible mess that no software would be able to tell what part is the woofer and what is the mid.
tuxedocivic is online now  
post #9 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 04:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
mogrub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Merica
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 127
This is a great resource, thanks Scott.
mogrub is online now  
post #10 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 05:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Posts: 5,080
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 657
Canton, I was wondering about that as well. I think they were talking about the 120hz LPF on the LFE channel. The LPF will induce phase, however, nobody runs their subs that high, they all cross at something like 80hz. At least everyone with a receiver of that potential (elimate HTIBs and cheesy 3" sat speakers). So the 80hz XO is really the phase we're interested in. Any "phase" caused by the electronics, disc, LPF in the LFE, what ever, should just be ignored and tackled at the end of the line - what comes out the front of the speaker. Which is what you're saying I believe. Trying to tackle the issue upstream is merely doing the job twice. Once upstream, another downstream.
tuxedocivic is online now  
post #11 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Skylinestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
Canton, I was wondering about that as well. I think they were talking about the 120hz LPF on the LFE channel. The LPF will induce phase, however, nobody runs their subs that high, they all cross at something like 80hz. At least everyone with a receiver of that potential (elimate HTIBs and cheesy 3" sat speakers). So the 80hz XO is really the phase we're interested in. Any "phase" caused by the electronics, disc, LPF in the LFE, what ever, should just be ignored and tackled at the end of the line - what comes out the front of the speaker. Which is what you're saying I believe. Trying to tackle the issue upstream is merely doing the job twice. Once upstream, another downstream.
I do run my system at 120Hz XO despite having 5.25" woofer speaker. I have AudysseyXT with Antimode8033. The Antimode did a better job at correcting anything below 250Hz. Hence, I would like the majority of the bass to be corrected by Antimode. I've tried with 80Hz XO but got a dip in the 100Hz region, which XT cannot resolve, even after manually adjusting sub distance. Bumping up the XO fix this. In fact, 150Hz XO will render a smoother frequency response.
If my method of adjustment is wrong, I'm wondering if the main speaker placement is to be blamed.
Skylinestar is online now  
post #12 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 05:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
canton160's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK & Portugal
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 34
There 2 ways to adjust the "phase delay" between sub and speakers.

A)move the sub closer to the sweet spot .
or
B) add delay to the mains to match the delay in the sub, and later manually fine- tunning the sub with 0-180 switch...

What i was interested to find out, is how pioneer add delay to the mains....with a real processor built-in in the receiver something like THIS ? or messing with the speakers distances between sub and speakers when auto phase control plus is ON ??

Portuguese Blog & Forum Discussion about Audio & Video
Visit our Blog & Forum CinemaHIFI.PT
Like cinemahifi on Facebook

Last edited by canton160; 07-17-2014 at 05:43 PM.
canton160 is offline  
post #13 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 06:13 PM
Member
 
Steelman99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Thanks Scott. For me, proper MCACC calibration made a big difference.
Steelman99 is online now  
post #14 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 07:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
canton160's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK & Portugal
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Kudos for pioneer for trying to informed the consumer, on how things works, but is preferable to do it at right way, the way their whiter paper shows it, with all due respect for pioneer engenniers IMHO some stuff is wrong

Take a look at the picture from pioneer white paper..



"superior sound provided by compensating the lag in the subwoofer channel of the disk"

Since theres the delay in the main speakers due the electronic, lets not forget that modern subs this days they use DSP programming, this also causes even more DELAY (ms)..

Please remember : You cannot take away the inherent delay in the entire electro-mechanical physics of the sub, but you can ADD further electrical delay... using the knob at 180 its like adding 6.25 msec of delay, or like moving sub 7 feet way.

See this video from the 7th minute for better understanding, and see what happens when you take way electronically delay to the subwoofer (like pioneer mention in white paper and in picture )

It loses dynamic....and take a look at the oscilloscope screen..

Please use headphones for clearly hear the diferences in video...


Portuguese Blog & Forum Discussion about Audio & Video
Visit our Blog & Forum CinemaHIFI.PT
Like cinemahifi on Facebook

Last edited by canton160; 07-18-2014 at 02:39 AM.
canton160 is offline  
post #15 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 07:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chashint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Pioneer has long held to the position that better sound is achieved through phase control (phase matching).
I do not know if Pioneer is correct or not but that is their stated position and a primary objective in the MCACC.
If the MCACC is indeed aligning the phase of the system measured to the mic position it's not a marketing ploy.
Does this make the system sound better? I don't know, but bass cancellation is real as are standing waves so getting the speakers all phase corrected to the MLP can't hurt anything.

Thanks for the file, while it's not really a white paper the illustrations are nice and should probably be in the owners manual.

Regards,
Charlie

chashint is offline  
post #16 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 08:26 PM
Senior Member
 
LairdWilliams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
Just had a quick read over it. A few thoughts:
...
3. Their "Standing Wave Control" sounds like a 3 band PEQ on the subs, nothing more.
Correct - except that they are configured with a higher Q than an EQ typically would be. Think something more like notch filters. You have these spikes at the standing wave frequencies for the 3 typical physical dimensions of your room - and you notch them out to rebalance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
4. Full band phase control. This is interesting. I'm not sure there's any benefit and I'm a little unsure how they can get the data to do what they say they're doing. I think you'd need anechoic measurements to do this. Also, the example they show has the woofer showing up in the IR 2ms behind the tweeter and mid. Perhaps there are speakers out there, that bad, but I've never seen one. I generally don't believe this is all that useful, but I'm not sure.
It is a huge deal on my system - and it improves the sound dramatically. I have perfectly-matched not-exactly-crappy speakers in the 5 "mains" - fronts, center, and surrounds. The difference in sonic quality between full band phase control on and off is like day and night. It is a huge deal - and it improves the sound substantially - especially the imaging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
...
6. Lots of emphases on phase, although I think it's mostly about distance. Phase sounds more impressive.
Emphasis on phase is well-placed - and it is definitely not just about distance - or even mostly about distance .... although the document does do only a middling job of making the point.

Display: Panasonic P60UT50 (Plasma)
Speakers: (4) Monitor Audio Silver 9i (Front and Surround), (1) Monitor Audio Silver 12i (Center), (4) Monitor Audio Silver 4i (Rear and Wide), (2) Aperion Audio Bravus II 8d (Subwoofers)
Receiver: Pioneer Elite SC-87 AVR (9.2)
Sources: Oppo BDP-103, Roku 3, Cable...
LairdWilliams is offline  
post #17 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 08:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
Sean Spamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
just goes to show how far behind pioneer has been this whole time.

I think Anthem's ARC deserves a special mention here as one that is possibly surpassing Audyssey XT32 with its ability to be customized with real time feedback.
ARC is great, but until it provides the ability to EQ to sub-woofers independently it's a non-starter for me.
Sean Spamilton is offline  
post #18 of 48 Old 07-17-2014, 08:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Posts: 5,080
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 657
Hi Laird. A couple question. I take it you're an MCACC user.

3. What is higher Q about it than a typical PEQ? Most PEQs can go to 5.0 or even higher. I doubt higher is ever needed for a room mode. Hence, nothing special MCACC is doing here.

4. Do you have any data or measurements showing that this feature is actually manipulating the IR? Are you sure the change you're hearing is what the white paper is suggesting? I'm perplexed how a microphone at the LP can do such a thing and I'm perplexed how a passive speaker can altered in such a way by dsp. If it can do what it's saying, I'll be looking to change receivers. That's major stuff there.
tuxedocivic is online now  
post #19 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 08:02 AM
Senior Member
 
LairdWilliams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
Hi Laird. A couple question. I take it you're an MCACC user.

3. What is higher Q about it than a typical PEQ? Most PEQs can go to 5.0 or even higher. I doubt higher is ever needed for a room mode. Hence, nothing special MCACC is doing here.
Most notch filters go much higher than 5.0. They are used for specific, very-narrow-band EQ to control resonance and feedback problems. Don't underestimate the impact of standing waves either. Stop thinking "dedicated home theater" and think "family room" - with hard walls and a hard ceiling. You can end up with some really significant resonance in such an environment.

Notch filters are extremely common in live gear, and are pretty easy to program. I don't know for a fact that the MCACC correction is actually a notch - but that would be the right type of EQ to use for controlling standing waves, since the frequencies involved are very narrow band and often need significant attenuation to control. You want narrow band specifically BECAUSE you want to minimize their impact on the overall frequency profile. You use a traditional EQ to change the shape of a system's frequency profile. You use a notch filter to "knock out" specific frequencies WITHOUT having a significant impact on the rest of the overall profile. They are certainly using it like a notch filter. It would be rather foolish to do otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
4. Do you have any data or measurements showing that this feature is actually manipulating the IR? Are you sure the change you're hearing is what the white paper is suggesting? I'm perplexed how a microphone at the LP can do such a thing and I'm perplexed how a passive speaker can altered in such a way by dsp. If it can do what it's saying, I'll be looking to change receivers. That's major stuff there.
They are not altering the speaker. They have the output that was sent to the speaker. The mic gives them the output that came FROM the speaker. The algorithm compares the two to find where the phase shifts occur, and then uses a heuristic method (as described in a little more detail in the later pages of the marketing paper) to fit a pre-programmed phase "correction" profile to the system. When "Full Band Phase Control" is on, it applies that profile as pretty much the last step before going to the DAC. When "full band phase control" is off, the profile is not applied. It does not need to use the mic again unless you change speakers - so the determination and curve fit (which are computationally-intensive) are not being done in real-time - only the application of the fitted "correction" profile.

It is an extremely easy feature to isolate and test - since it is one of several parts of MCAAC that can be independently turned on and off in real-time while listening - from an iPad in another room. I have come about as close as i can get with my rig to running double-blinds with a couple dozen guests and the impact is pronounced. Skype texting from the iPad to their phones to ask the "optometrist question" ("This, or this?") while toggling (or not) the state of the Full Band Phase Control as they listen. The material is almost always multi-channel music in a wide range of genres (everything from Elgar and Debussy to Pink Floyd and Porcupine Tree).

I don't have the gear that would be needed to measure the audible speaker output beyond having a decent dB meter (so at least I can control for volume in my experiments) and a real-time spectrum analyzer in my phone - which is a fun toy, but since I have no confidence that the software is in the least bit calibrated to the mic on the phone, it is kind of useless.

Whether the "compensation" that is applied to the signal before it goes to the speakers is "accurate" and actually results in superior phase alignment, I cannot say for certain - although I have no reason to disbelieve Pioneer in this case. Indirect evidence is the superior imaging on my system when FBPC is turned on. As imaging is one of the first things that goes to heck when phase alignment is off-kilter...

I can say that there is a huge difference in the sound on my system just from toggling FBPC on an off, and that the sound is vastly superior with it turned on, and that the other listeners to my system agree rather enthusiastically.
LeKnobber likes this.

Display: Panasonic P60UT50 (Plasma)
Speakers: (4) Monitor Audio Silver 9i (Front and Surround), (1) Monitor Audio Silver 12i (Center), (4) Monitor Audio Silver 4i (Rear and Wide), (2) Aperion Audio Bravus II 8d (Subwoofers)
Receiver: Pioneer Elite SC-87 AVR (9.2)
Sources: Oppo BDP-103, Roku 3, Cable...

Last edited by LairdWilliams; 07-18-2014 at 08:05 AM.
LairdWilliams is offline  
post #20 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 09:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MSchu18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 155
sub'ed

VPI Classic 2/Soundsmith Aida-Rega P5/Groovetracer/Denon DL-103R
Parks Audio Budgie Pre Amp-Budgie SUT
Pioneer SC35-Bel Canto REF 500M
Klipsch Cornwall/Crites/Aletheia Audio-Klisch RC64II-Klipsch SW-115
Samsung PN64D8000-OPPO BDP-93
Klipsch Image Ones-Klipsch x11i
MSchu18 is offline  
post #21 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 10:54 AM
Senior Member
 
WebEffect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Will the sound from this Pioneer-made system start drifting and distorting after a few years and they'll refuse to provide a fix, as happened with the "black" on their Kuro televisions? I would need a written promise from the company that A) They didn't screw up this time, and B) That they will not abandon their customers, before I would buy another one of their products.

I fell for it once already when I read their descriptions of the "blackness" in the Kuro before I bought it. Now they came out with an even fancier description: white papers? Never again. Sorry.
WebEffect is offline  
post #22 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Posts: 5,080
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 657
Laird,

3. As I said, this is just 3 PEQs. Nothing special here. I'm not sure what you're trying to say differently. I fully understand what a notch filter is and even how to apply it. MCACC does nothing special here that I can see.

4. Well as someone who knows how to and has the equipment to take an IR and knows how to interpret them, I find their explanation perplexing. That doesn't mean you're not hearing something or that MCACC isn't doing anything. I'm sure it is. I just don't understand their technical presentation and how it works. And I have a pretty good grasp of the subject. I even posted an example of an IR that I measured myself. What you're saying they do and what their paper is saying they do are two different things it seems to me.

Again, nothing against their system. It looks great. I'm sure it improves the sound you hear. I just am saying that on point 3 they're simply marketing and on point 4 they've lost me or its more marketing.
tuxedocivic is online now  
post #23 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
garciab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Princeton, TX - USA
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Wait...didn't Pioneer get out of the a/v business?

bg
garciab is offline  
post #24 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 340
^^
No.

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #25 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Spamilton View Post
ARC is great, but until it provides the ability to EQ to sub-woofers independently it's a non-starter for me.
Sean, understand that point, and its a good one since setting the levels and delays of 2 subs creates a whole 'nother step that adds to the PITA factor. However, I don't think Audyssey EQ's sub-woofers independently either, but rather just conveniently sets the level and delay for you. Since the bass is omnidirectional it EQ's the combined response as a single unit - not sure exactly why you would desire to EQ them independently since its the combined response you are looking for since it shares a single channel (lets not dive into the stereo bass crowd on this one )
mo949 is offline  
post #26 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 01:51 PM
Member
 
mwahlert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
On paper, how does MCACC Pro compare to XT32 with SubEQ HT?
mwahlert is offline  
post #27 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 08:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
datranz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: fontana, california
Posts: 1,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 37
More option for customization. Aud is more advance but locked unless upgrade to pro. I like mcacc more with my settings. I went from a vsx23 to den 4310 then back to sc1522 with minidsp.
datranz is offline  
post #28 of 48 Old 07-18-2014, 10:53 PM
Senior Member
 
LairdWilliams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
Laird,

3. As I said, this is just 3 PEQs. Nothing special here. I'm not sure what you're trying to say differently. I fully understand what a notch filter is and even how to apply it. MCACC does nothing special here that I can see.

4. Well as someone who knows how to and has the equipment to take an IR and knows how to interpret them, I find their explanation perplexing. That doesn't mean you're not hearing something or that MCACC isn't doing anything. I'm sure it is. I just don't understand their technical presentation and how it works. And I have a pretty good grasp of the subject. I even posted an example of an IR that I measured myself. What you're saying they do and what their paper is saying they do are two different things it seems to me.

Again, nothing against their system. It looks great. I'm sure it improves the sound you hear. I just am saying that on point 3 they're simply marketing and on point 4 they've lost me or its more marketing.
Ok - great. So where is it that you and I disagree exactly?

Display: Panasonic P60UT50 (Plasma)
Speakers: (4) Monitor Audio Silver 9i (Front and Surround), (1) Monitor Audio Silver 12i (Center), (4) Monitor Audio Silver 4i (Rear and Wide), (2) Aperion Audio Bravus II 8d (Subwoofers)
Receiver: Pioneer Elite SC-87 AVR (9.2)
Sources: Oppo BDP-103, Roku 3, Cable...
LairdWilliams is offline  
post #29 of 48 Old 07-19-2014, 07:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
Sean Spamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
Sean, understand that point, and its a good one since setting the levels and delays of 2 subs creates a whole 'nother step that adds to the PITA factor. However, I don't think Audyssey EQ's sub-woofers independently either, but rather just conveniently sets the level and delay for you. Since the bass is omnidirectional it EQ's the combined response as a single unit - not sure exactly why you would desire to EQ them independently since its the combined response you are looking for since it shares a single channel (lets not dive into the stereo bass crowd on this one )
Agreed. The delay and level adjustment makes things much smoother as far as I'm concerned. Independent EQ was a poor choice of wording on my part.
Sean Spamilton is offline  
post #30 of 48 Old 07-19-2014, 12:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pdxrealtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,523
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Seems there are a lot of people around here, even who use Audessy, that circumvent the level matching and go straight to gain matching. I spent a great deal of time reading about both sides reasoning. In the end it made more sense to me to gain match.

I tried an SVS As-EQ1 (Audyssey xt32) and I was not impressed. Could have been my room but that was part of the turn off. The ASEQ1 could not get a flat curve in my room, but I can with a minidsp pretty easily. On top of that after I shape he curve I can apply an l/t or a shelf filter to create a custom house curve.

RE: MCACC I'm sold. Pioneer has been in the game for a long time. They work with air studios who are highly regarded. The full band phase control has been praised more than once, it's not a gimmick. The digital tape measure is dead on every time I measure. The user adjustable settings are, for me, spectacular.

The lack of bass EQ is actually a plus for me. IMO an external PEQ to handle sub duty is much preferred and will give the user the ability to really get the subs dialed in how the user wants them dialed in.

JMO YMMV

FS- Netgear 550 .ISO player - PM me
My Gear-Pioneer, JBL Pro Cinema, Fi Car Audio 4- SP4 18", Peavey IPR2 7500 x 4 -Mini-Dsp 4x10, GIK Acoustics, Seymour Screens 110" AT, Dune Smarts, uNraid Server
Theater Build and Two Sono Sub Builds Here-
pdxrealtor is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
frontpage



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off